The Martin Agency’s Shockoe Slip headquarters. (BizSense file photo)
A yearslong lawsuit from a former Martin Agency executive that was scheduled to go to trial this week has come to a halt, though the legal battle may not be over.
Last month, more than four years after the original suit was filed, a Richmond Circuit judge nonsuited the case brought by Joe Alexander, who claimed he was the victim of a conspiracy to tarnish his reputation after he parted ways with Martin in late 2017 amid sexual harassment claims made against him within the agency.
Alexander, the agency’s top creative executive at the time, argued in his initial $50 million claim that Martin and other defendants leaked the terms of a confidential 2013 settlement agreement stemming from a previous harassment accusation and disclosed personnel files as part of a #MeToo campaign against Alexander.
Originally consisting of nine claims against different groupings of defendants, the case had been stripped down and amended over the years, with all but one of the claims against Martin and parent company Interpublic Group dismissed. The remaining claim against them – breach of contract – was one of three that made up an amended complaint, which sought the same amount in compensatory damages.
The case had been scheduled for a four-day trial starting Feb. 20, but was dismissed via a nonsuit filing in January at the request of Alexander, whose legal counsel changed unexpectedly six months ago.
That dismissal was made without prejudice, meaning the case could be refiled at a later date. On Friday, Alexander’s new attorney, Richard Hawkins III, said he planned to do so.
Responding to questions from BizSense, Hawkins said in an email: “Mr. Alexander will be re-filing the lawsuit within the next few weeks.”
Alexander, who remains based in Richmond and works as a freelancer, deferred comment to Hawkins when reached Friday.
In a statement to BizSense last week, Martin and Interpublic Group said they would continue to fight the remaining claim.
“The court had already dismissed the majority of these claims. We continue to believe the one remaining claim also lacks merit, and will defend ourselves vigorously against any new action,” the statement said.
Joe Alexander
Filed in October 2019, the lawsuit was one of two complaints brought by Alexander nearly two years after he left Martin amid reports from news outlets that multiple sexual harassment claims had been made against him by agency employees. Alexander denied the allegations.
A federal defamation claim seeking $25 million was dismissed in 2020 on jurisdictional grounds. According to the court opinion calling for that dismissal, Alexander was given the choice to contest the harassment claims or resign, and he chose the latter, leaving the agency in December 2017.
Alexander’s exit started a wave of leadership changes at Martin, including the appointments of the agency’s first female CEO and chief creative officer.
The CEO, Kristen Cavallo, now at IPG’s MullenLowe, was among the other defendants named in Alexander’s initial circuit court suit.
The suit described media coverage of the events as intended to tarnish Alexander’s reputation and make it impossible for him to continue to work in the industry. Before his departure, Alexander had worked at Martin for 26 years, the last five of those as chief creative officer.
The original complaint alleged defamation against Martin and IPG, but that claim and others were dismissed in November 2020, in part because of a one-year statute of limitations that had expired by the time the suits were filed in October 2019, two years after the alleged defamation.
The breach of contract claim that remained against Martin and IPG centered on a news article that, according to the suit, was posted on Martin’s website in January 2019 and included terms of the confidential 2013 settlement agreement.
In late August, Alexander’s original attorney – Steven Biss of Charlottesville – suffered “a major medical event” that left him “unable to prosecute” the case, according to a Dec. 4 filing from Hawkins.
Hawkins, a Richmond attorney who took over the case in September, requested in the same filing that the trial date be pushed to later this year, to give him more time to get up to speed on the case and provide discovery documents that Martin and IPG had requested and been granted by court order last May.
In October, Martin’s and IPG’s attorneys filed a request to compel Alexander to produce the documents or to have the case dismissed, arguing that he had not complied with the May court order.
After a hearing in mid-December, Hawkins requested the nonsuit, which was granted Jan. 5 but was amended two weeks later to acknowledge the previous rulings and dismissals in the case. The original nonsuit order dismissed the claims in the amended complaint without prejudice, but the amendment noted that some of those claims had been dismissed with prejudice, restricting them from a refiling.
On Friday, Hawkins filed a notice of appeal of the amended nonsuit order to the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
Martin and IPG have been represented locally by Christian & Barton attorney David Lacy, who led a team that included attorneys with New York firm Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.
The Martin Agency’s Shockoe Slip headquarters. (BizSense file photo)
A yearslong lawsuit from a former Martin Agency executive that was scheduled to go to trial this week has come to a halt, though the legal battle may not be over.
Last month, more than four years after the original suit was filed, a Richmond Circuit judge nonsuited the case brought by Joe Alexander, who claimed he was the victim of a conspiracy to tarnish his reputation after he parted ways with Martin in late 2017 amid sexual harassment claims made against him within the agency.
Alexander, the agency’s top creative executive at the time, argued in his initial $50 million claim that Martin and other defendants leaked the terms of a confidential 2013 settlement agreement stemming from a previous harassment accusation and disclosed personnel files as part of a #MeToo campaign against Alexander.
Originally consisting of nine claims against different groupings of defendants, the case had been stripped down and amended over the years, with all but one of the claims against Martin and parent company Interpublic Group dismissed. The remaining claim against them – breach of contract – was one of three that made up an amended complaint, which sought the same amount in compensatory damages.
The case had been scheduled for a four-day trial starting Feb. 20, but was dismissed via a nonsuit filing in January at the request of Alexander, whose legal counsel changed unexpectedly six months ago.
That dismissal was made without prejudice, meaning the case could be refiled at a later date. On Friday, Alexander’s new attorney, Richard Hawkins III, said he planned to do so.
Responding to questions from BizSense, Hawkins said in an email: “Mr. Alexander will be re-filing the lawsuit within the next few weeks.”
Alexander, who remains based in Richmond and works as a freelancer, deferred comment to Hawkins when reached Friday.
In a statement to BizSense last week, Martin and Interpublic Group said they would continue to fight the remaining claim.
“The court had already dismissed the majority of these claims. We continue to believe the one remaining claim also lacks merit, and will defend ourselves vigorously against any new action,” the statement said.
Joe Alexander
Filed in October 2019, the lawsuit was one of two complaints brought by Alexander nearly two years after he left Martin amid reports from news outlets that multiple sexual harassment claims had been made against him by agency employees. Alexander denied the allegations.
A federal defamation claim seeking $25 million was dismissed in 2020 on jurisdictional grounds. According to the court opinion calling for that dismissal, Alexander was given the choice to contest the harassment claims or resign, and he chose the latter, leaving the agency in December 2017.
Alexander’s exit started a wave of leadership changes at Martin, including the appointments of the agency’s first female CEO and chief creative officer.
The CEO, Kristen Cavallo, now at IPG’s MullenLowe, was among the other defendants named in Alexander’s initial circuit court suit.
The suit described media coverage of the events as intended to tarnish Alexander’s reputation and make it impossible for him to continue to work in the industry. Before his departure, Alexander had worked at Martin for 26 years, the last five of those as chief creative officer.
The original complaint alleged defamation against Martin and IPG, but that claim and others were dismissed in November 2020, in part because of a one-year statute of limitations that had expired by the time the suits were filed in October 2019, two years after the alleged defamation.
The breach of contract claim that remained against Martin and IPG centered on a news article that, according to the suit, was posted on Martin’s website in January 2019 and included terms of the confidential 2013 settlement agreement.
In late August, Alexander’s original attorney – Steven Biss of Charlottesville – suffered “a major medical event” that left him “unable to prosecute” the case, according to a Dec. 4 filing from Hawkins.
Hawkins, a Richmond attorney who took over the case in September, requested in the same filing that the trial date be pushed to later this year, to give him more time to get up to speed on the case and provide discovery documents that Martin and IPG had requested and been granted by court order last May.
In October, Martin’s and IPG’s attorneys filed a request to compel Alexander to produce the documents or to have the case dismissed, arguing that he had not complied with the May court order.
After a hearing in mid-December, Hawkins requested the nonsuit, which was granted Jan. 5 but was amended two weeks later to acknowledge the previous rulings and dismissals in the case. The original nonsuit order dismissed the claims in the amended complaint without prejudice, but the amendment noted that some of those claims had been dismissed with prejudice, restricting them from a refiling.
On Friday, Hawkins filed a notice of appeal of the amended nonsuit order to the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
Martin and IPG have been represented locally by Christian & Barton attorney David Lacy, who led a team that included attorneys with New York firm Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.